State of Alabama

Impaired Driving Strategic Plan

2017-2019

May 11, 2017

Table of Contents

Page

Executive Summary 3

1.0Alabama’s Impaired Driving (ID) Challenge11

1.1Magnitude and Classification of Alabama’s ID Problem11

1.1.1ID Crashes Compared to Non-ID Crashes11

1.1.2Ten Year ID Crash & Citation Trends14

1.1.3General Categories of ID Crashes17

1.2Strategic Plan Mission and Goal Statements21

1.3Guiding Principles in the ID Strategic Plan (IDSP) Development23

1.4Relationship to the State Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) Efforts23

1.5Organization of the ID Strategic Plan25

2.0Program Management26

2.1Alabama Impaired Driving Prevention Council (AIDPC)26

2.2Strategic Planning Organization27

2.3Management28

2.4Resources29

2.5Data and Records29

3.0Prevention30

3.1Responsible Alcohol Service30

3.2Community Based Programs31

3.3.1Schools31

3.3.2Employers32

3.3.3Community Coalitions and Programs32

4.0Criminal Justice Approaches34

4.1Laws34

4.2Enforcement37

4.2.1Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) Program38

4.2.2Intensive Focused Impaired Driving Enforcement Effort39

4.3Publicizing High Visibility Enforcement41

4.4Prosecution41

4.5Adjudication42

4.5.1 Court Referral Program42

4.5.2Drug Courts44

4.5.3DUI (Alcohol) Courts45

4.5.4Pardons and Paroles46

4.6Administrative Sanctions and Driver License Programs46

4.6.1Administrative License Revocation47

4.6.2Vehicle Sanctions47

4.6.3Supportive Programs48

4.7Training49

4.7.1Law Enforcement Training49

4.7.2Interdisciplinary Training53

4.7.3Public Education Training55

5.0Communication Program56

5.1Alabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs56

5.1.1General Public Safety Announcements56

5.1.2Safe Home Alabama Web Site57

5.2Alabama Department of Public Safety58

5.3Alabama Department of Transportation Outreach Team Program59

5.4Traffic Safety Research Prosecutor59

5.5 Alabama Department of Public Health60

6.0Drug (Including Alcohol) Misuse62

6.1Screening and Assessment62

6.1.1Criminal Justice System62

6.1.2Medical and Health Care Settings62

6.2Treatment and Rehabilitation63

6.3Monitoring of Identified Past Impaired Drivers63

7.0Program Evaluation and Data Collection65

7.1Problem Identification Process65

7.2Evaluation Process67

Appendix A. Specific Location Problem Identification Results70

Appendix B. General Problem Identification Results 85

Appendix C.Detailed Legislative Recommendations 120

Appendix D.Adult Drug Court Map 124

State Of Alabama

Impaired Driving Strategic Plan

Executive Summary

This section will present an overall top down view of the Impaired Driving (ID) Strategic Plan. The document was created approved and issued on May 11, 2017 by the Alabama Impaired Driving Prevention Council (AIDPC), which was established to provide ongoing governance to the development of the Plan and its execution.

The plan is organized according to the recommendations of NHTSA Uniform Guidelines for State Highway Safety Programs (No. 8, November 2006), and thus has the major topics of:

  • Alabama’s Impaired Driving (ID) Challenge
  • Program Management
  • Prevention
  • Criminal Justice Approaches
  • Communication Program
  • Drug (Including Alcohol) Misuse
  • Program Evaluation and Data Collection

This summary will be organized according to these topical areas.

Alabama’s Impaired Driving (ID) Challenge

This part of the plan involved discussions of:

  • The Magnitude and Classification of Alabama’s ID Problem in terms of impaired driving crashes, impaired driving citations and a summary of the problem identification categories that are elaborated upon in Section 1 and the Appendixes. General conclusions drawn include:
  • The number of reported ID-caused crashes has been trending lower when viewed over ten years; it is hoped that this is due to the reality of what is occurring on the highways as opposed to the reduction in law enforcement presence.
  • Based on the 2012-2014 comparison of CARE numbers with FARS estimates, ID-caused fatality crashes are under-reported by approximately 16%; the under-reporting of ID-involved crashes of all severity is much higher and might be as high as 50%, postulating that only about half of them are being reported as such.
  • The proportion of ID crashes reportedly caused by drugs other than alcohol has increased from a low point of 12.1% in 2004 to its current value of 32.1%, indicating that close to one-third of all ID-involved crashes involve the driver using some drug (could be in combination with alcohol, and could be prescription).
  • The analysis of eCite data indicates that the number of citations issued dropped off in 2013 and 2014 by over 9.0%; the AIDPC law enforcement members attributed this to the great recent reductions in their forces due to attrition (un-replaced retired positions). However, the number of citations increased comparable to its previous levels in 2015.
  • Analyses of ID-related crashes were performed to show that the typical ID crash occurs in rural areas (county roads), with male drivers between the ages of 21 and 35, during the night-time hours on weekends, and is much more severe than non-ID crashes due to the high impact speeds, lack of proper restraints, late night hours, rural locations and time to obtain EMS assistance.
  • These analyses also indicated a dramatic over-representation in ID- not having a valid license and being unemployed.
  • The ID strategic mission and goal statements:
  • Mission statement: To maximize the impact of a harmonious collaborative effort to reduce ID fatalities, injuries and crashes to the lowest level possible, and ultimately to eliminate them altogether.
  • Goal statement:Reduce the alcohol-impaired driving fatalities by 0.77 percent from the five year baseline average of 261 (2010-2014) to a five year average goal of 259 including 2017 (2013-2017).
  • The guiding Principles in the ID Strategic Plan Development, which recognized the diverse nature of its mission, the need to coordinate activities statewide, the need for data-driven, evidence based policies, and the fact that the problem is an ingrained cultural one that will require a wide variety of efforts to counteract.
  • The relationship to the State Strategic Highway Safety Plan Efforts, which give every indication of being quite cooperative and complementary.

Program Management

This part of the plan involved discussions of:

  • The creation and functioning of the Alabama Impaired Driving Prevention Council (AIDPC), including its charge, and the fact that it was not just a planning group, but would have continuing responsibilities in implementing the plans that they would establish.
  • The strategic planning organization and how each of the various contributing agencies and service groups would interact to create the plan.
  • Management of the program and the fact that the AIDPC will meet on a quarterly basis and between meetings serve to review documents and programs within their respective organizational purviews.
  • Resources and the fact that plans should not be restricted to those action items that were anticipated to receive funding; instead, sufficient resources were assumed to be available to accomplish the plan, and there was a recognition that the plan was for three years and some required funding might be available in the “out years.”
  • Data and Records, including the recognition of the Traffic Records Coordinating Committee and the plan that they have recently submitted. Considerable elaboration on this subject is given in Section 7 and Appendixes A and B.

Prevention

The State’s prevention program has the goal of reducing impaired driving through public health approaches, includingaltering social norms, changing risky or dangerous behaviors, and creating safer environments. This is the first section of the plan that described current activities that are on-going in the various agencies. These action areas were further subdivided into the following:

  • Responsible alcohol service, which includes the prevention of: (1) underagedrinking and (2) “over-service” to people age 21 and older. This included discussions of:
  • Alabama’s Dram Shop law
  • The role of the Alabama Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC)
  • Action item: Work closely with private restaurant and other trade organizations to establish some formal programs for education and training with regard to server responsibilities, including Dram Shop provisions.
  • Community based programs, referring to those organizations and agencies that currently exist to fulfill other primary goals, but have a health and safety mission. These involved:
  • Schools;action items:
  • Provide training to those involved with the educational system through the Drug Impairment Training for the Educational Professional (DITEP) courses.
  • Employers, the action item of which was to initiate AIDPC interaction with private companies and trade organizations that have a common goal of reducing crashes caused by ID.
  • Community coalitions and programsthat provide the opportunity to conduct prevention programs collaboratively with all interested parties at the local level.
  • Support legislation that will help to eliminate all underage drinking and drug use.
  • Promote stronger GDL laws and their enforcement.
  • Create greater awareness of the role that negative advertising plays on young people in all areas of unsafe driving.

Criminal Justice Approaches

This set of countermeasure approaches includes the entire criminal justice system, including laws, enforcement,prosecution, adjudication, criminal and administrative sanctions and related communications. The goal is to achieve both specific (individual offenders) and general deterrence (public perception). This very broad and general area was subdivided into the following specific topics

  • Laws, which included:
  • General areas of legislation that were recommended within the Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP);
  • Twelve more specific recommendations put forward by the AIDPC; and
  • Three very detailed (actual mark-ups) of laws that are contained in Appendix C.
  • Enforcement, which was detailed in two categories:
  • Drug Recognition Experts (DREs); action items:
  • Increase the number of DREs by at least six per year over the next four years.
  • Under the oversight of the AIDPC, establish a special task force to study methods for the better implementation of the DRE program, especially to promote its value so that state and local agencies will take advantage of the DRE training opportunities.
  • Determine if legislation or other state policies might be needed in support of the DRE program.
  • Intensive focused impaired driving enforcement efforts, which are detailed to the specific locations to be covered in Section 4.2.2 and Appendix A.
  • Publicizing high visibility enforcement;action items:
  • Promote the concept among law enforcement that their efforts are multiplied at least 100% by the use of effective Public Information and Education(PI&E).
  • Study the current PI&E efforts to determine areas in which they can be improved.
  • Implement improved PI&E efforts as determined by the evaluations.
  • Prosecution, which is quite relevant since impaired driving cases are some of the most litigiously complex cases in the judicial system; yet they are routinely handled by the most inexperienced prosecutors. Action items:
  • Continue to maintain a full time Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor (TSRP) dedicated exclusively to highway traffic safety prosecution and enforcement issues to provide ongoing support to all prosecution cases.
  • Support the TSRP in conducting a number of training courses as specified in Section 4.7.
  • Implement a pilot program called DUI/Drug (DUI/D) days. This will be a new program with the goal of ensuring that the courts and all other relevant persons in the criminal justice system are aware of the services provide by the Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences (ADFS), and that they take advantage of those services. This will also serve to reduce ADFS time out of the laboratory via effective time management and planning. The plan calls for the initiation of DUI/D days within specific courts, where a toxicologist is present to cover DUI/D specific docket for the day. This pilot should start out in some of the larger jurisdictions that have more DUI/D cases. Consideration will also be given to utilizing video/phone testimony when available.
  • Adjudication, which resulted in recommendations for three existing entities within the state:
  • Court Referral Officer (CRO) Program; action items:
  • Continue to implement the CRO program as described by the various planning activities described in Section 4.5.1.
  • Assure that the CRO program is well publicized throughout the judicial system and take whatever steps are necessary to assure that this program is being used universally.
  • Provide additional liaison between the CRO program and newly developing Drug and DUI (Alcohol) Courts.
  • Continue to maintain and further modernize Model Impaired Driver Access System (MIDAS), so that it stays current with existing information technology developments.
  • Specialty Courts; Action Items:
  • Publicize the benefits of Specialty Courts to stakeholders in the justice system, as well as members of the community.
  • Assure effective liaison between Specialty Courts and the CRO Programs.
  • Consider ways the concept of the 24/7 Sobriety Program can be integrated into the Specialty Court programs.
  • DUI Courts; Action Items:
  • Fully evaluate the costs and benefits both in terms of recidivism and its total impact on the criminal justice system.
  • Modify the current model in any areas where deficiencies are found.
  • Once validated, extend this model to at least five counties per year.
  • Consider ways that the concept of the 24/7 Sobriety Program can be integrated into the DUI Court programs
  • Pardons and Paroles (P&P); Action Items:
  • Advise probationers and parolees that impaired driving is not exclusive to only alcohol, and that individuals should be aware of their intake of narcotic and other pain medications.
  • Officers should conduct evening and night home visits to help identify those offenders who are still drinking or abusing drugs.
  • Establish a system such that arrest reports (details of offenses) for offenders under supervision from other agencies can be received within 72 hours of arrest for an impaired offense, and that an alert is sent out to the appropriate supervisor if/when there is any change to the offender’s record.
  • Have courts add a special condition of no alcohol for probationers convicted of impaired driving.
  • For those so sentenced, require defendants to be fitted with a Continuous Alcohol Monitoring Device that constantly measures the offender's alcohol content and communicates with P&P remotely, greatly reducing the number of visits and the amount of time the probation officers must spend meeting with impaired driving probationers. This will be a major savings in time and other resources for P&P in the area of impaired driving offender monitoring.
  • Administrative sanctions and driver license programs, which generated recommendations in three areas:
  • Administrative License Revocation-No administrative license revocation recommendation changes were made. The Council will rely on ALEA and council members to notify the group for any changes that need to be addressed and promoted.
  • Vehicle Sanctions; action items:
  • Investigate (by the AIDPC or a select panel) any issues regarding the full implementation of the Ignition Interlock Device (IID) laws to assure that any bottlenecks are removed and that the law can be fully implemented.
  • Conduct a study of the current IID statute to determine if a wider scope of implementation is justified, and if so, implement that extension.
  • Supportive Programs – to reinforce and complement the State’s overall program to deter and prevent impaired driving. Examples include the following types of countermeasures:
  • Graduated driver licensing (GDL) for novice drivers, especially those parts of the GDL that deal with impaired driving;
  • Education programs that explain alcohol’s effects on driving,
  • The State’s zero-tolerance laws for minors, and
  • Efforts to prevent individuals from using a fraudulently obtained or altered driver’s license.
  • Action items included:

Evaluate all current supportive programs to determine those that are most effective. Evaluations may be of existing programs within the state or similar programs in other states.

Move forward emphasizing those programs that show the greatest promised for success in Alabama.

  • Training – a large number of courses were recommended within this section; it was subdivided into the following:
  • Law enforcement training,
  • Interdisciplinary training.
  • Public education training

Communication Program

This general topic area was subdivided according to the agencies involved:

  • The Alabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs(ADECA) has been involved with the development of Public Service Announcements (PSAs), supporting Public Information and Education (PI&E) in general, and focusing these efforts around particular holiday events. Currently, ADECA funds the maintenance of the Safe Home Alabama (SHA) website, which is the only comprehensive traffic safety web site in the country (i.e., it does not favor any particular agency or service group and attempts to be totally comprehensive in its approach. Action items include:
  • Continue to use ADECA social media platforms and website to promote safe driving messages and awareness of Impaired Driving campaigns.
  • Continue to support these year-round PSA efforts.
  • Continue to support the ongoing maintenance of the SHA web site with current topics.
  • Bring the current web site up to date with a new version that assists users in finding what they are looking for on the site.
  • The Alabama Law Enforcement Agency, Public Information/Education Unit has a wide range of ongoing activities throughout the year, responding to special requests for information and officer participation in news events as well as participating in holiday and other special events. Action items:
  • Continue current communication efforts with strong coordination with ADECA, Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) and local agencies.
  • Continue to leverage current activities to deal with impaired driving; an example is the addition of an impaired driving cause to the weekly news releases being sponsored in part by ALDOT to include the number caused by impaired driving. Currently only the number of fatalities that were not properly restrained is being publicized.
  • Evaluate current PSA and PI&E efforts to establish strengths and weaknesses and move forward accordingly.
  • The ALDOT Highway Safety Marketing Outreach Program is an effort that involves approximately nine agencies and service groups. Action items:
  • Involve the ALDOT-hosted Outreach Team in all ID planning activities by establishing a formal liaison between the Outreach Team and the AIDPC.
  • Enlist the support of the Outreach Team in assuring that the ID Plan is integrated into the forthcoming update to the SHSP as an appendix.
  • The Traffic Safety Research Prosecutor (TSRP)maintains a web site that provides general ongoing information on courses conducted by the TSRP, and addresses the many issues that prosecutors of ID cases face. Action items:
  • Maintain support for the TSRP and promote and enlarge upon the communication efforts that are being made through the website and social media.
  • Provide additional publicity to the Alabama Drug Abuse Task Force (ADATF) and their reports so that all members of the AIDPC and the traffic safety community in general are aware of the ongoing findings.
  • The Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH) uses multiple platforms to inform the public about injury prevention, the child passenger restraint program, and the review of deaths among all ages. Action items:
  • Continue current/ongoing education, outreach, and prevention campaigns that address risks and trends of impaired driving
  • Use ACDRS/AVDRS findings to inform and support all appropriate impaired driving prevention efforts.
  • Continue current communication efforts with strong coordination with ALDOT, ALEA, ADECA, and other partners.

Drug (Including Alcohol) Misuse

This plan recognizes that impaired driving frequently is a symptom of a larger alcohol or other drug problem. This part of the plan has the goal of encouraging employers, educators, and health care professionals to implement systems toidentify, intervene, and refer individuals for appropriate substance abuse treatment. This effort will be subdivided into the following components: